The Handmaids Tale - Margaret Atwood

The Handmaids Tale is Atwood's dystopian classic exploring the theocratic nature of the Patriarchal Republic of Gilead. This novel tells the tale of Offred's life within the oppressive parallel Atwood predict's for America's future. The class divisions and excessive oppression within this text raise many questions about the truth behind the likelihood of Atwood's assumptions, and raises great amounts of fear to many critics. This novel, which will reach it's 30th anniversary next year, has become renowned for it's context drawing attention from many feminist critics. There is so much to discuss about this text I'm going to break it down into several smaller blog post.

My brief review of this novel is that it is a fantastic piece of dystopian fiction, with a very hard hitting and often depressing tone. The bounce between memories and the current events in Offred's life can be complicated to understand, but regardless of this it is a reasonably easy read. I would strongly recommend this to anyone who enjoys dystopian fiction of any age that views themselves as a reasonably mature reader and I would give Atwood a 9/10 and I definitely plan to read more of her works!

The Role Of Women in Gilead

The roles of the females in this novel are crucial to all readings of it and can expose a lot about the social hierarchy by simply looking at their names and their clothing:

• The Wives are always dressed in blue much like the Virgin Mary would wear, suggesting that their only role is to nurture a child and have no part in the reproductive system. This emphasis of keeping the Virgin Mary's image within upper class females is represented in the Daughters wearing white until they get married. White connotes purity and innocence which is promoted among the highest class of women from a young age, a sense that all higher class women should present themselves as a Holy symbol. The top social class in this society is also like the highest class in the bible and should maintain chastity. 
• The Handmaids are characters based off of the story of Jacob's wife in the Bible, Rachel, who when she failed to conceive a child for Jacob insisted he slept with his handmaid, this is used as the society's justification for their treatment of the handmaids. The handmaids continually dress in red; red as the colour of fire and blood is commonly associated with danger, energy, power, passion and love. The red could be interpreted as a reminder of their past, like a sign hanging around their neck pronouncing their shame, due to it's interpretations as passionate and love filled. It is also symbolic of the female body maturing and the Handmaids only use for their reproductive purpose and when that ability ceases to exist and they can no longer bear the child for the Wives they become useless, Unwoman (lesbians, feminists, nuns, sterile women who are politically dissident whom are exiled to the colonies to work and die).
• Later in the text we journey to a 'club' with Offred where we meet a group of women called Jezebel's. This name again is inspired by the bible, where Jezebel was denounced by Elijah for introducing the worship of Baal into Israel (1 Kings 16:31, 21:5-15, 2 Kings 9:30-7). The name Jezebel in the modern context has come to be a female known for their corruption and ill-attitude. The Jezebels in the Handmaids Tale are a mixture of Lesbians or attractive, educated women, something the novel makes clear is unwelcome in this biblical republic, and consequently are disregarded and their only purpose is as prostitutes, they are the corruptive force behind the social hierarchy in the reproductive system. Their only clothing provided is the degrading, sexualised out fits of 'previous times'.
• The Aunts are in charge of training the handmaids taking this role, as they are infact the only literate women still allowed in Gilead. The Aunts are always dressed in brown, a colour which connotes warmth, comfort, a set of connotations that is seemingly contradictory to  the harsh nature of the Aunts enforcing the corrupt regime on these young women. However, brown also connotes conservatism, a political idea we can see reflected in Gilead. The traditional idea that a women's only role in society is to be a house wife; cook, clean and provide a man with child. Aunt's take the place of the handmaid's mothers as it  is believed their own mothers are the corrupting force in their upbringing, the Aunt's are transforming the handmaids into their new lives and training them out of their previous attitudes.

Robinson Crusoe - Daniel Defoe

Robinson Crusoe is a piece of 18th Century Literature influenced by the life of Alexander Selkirk. Who was a a Scottish castaway who lived for four years on the Pacific island called "Más a Tierra" in Chile. It has gone down in history as a phenomenal classic, and it is well deserved of this title. In it's most basic form it is the story of a boy going against his fathers wishes (that he become a lawyer) and instead follows his dream of going to sea. Encountering multiple counts of bad luck Crusoe eventually ends up abandoned on a desert island with all his shipmates killed, leaving him to find a way of successful living with the constant fear that he could be murdered by savages. 

This novel plays to everyone's childhood dreams of living your life on an exotic island far away from any other civilisation. A concept that has been explored in many other works of literature (such as "Lord of the Flies") but not to such powerful levels as Defoe achieves. Each word Defoe writes leaves you hanging on in the hope that Crusoe may find some human company or fear that he will run out of things to survive or come into danger with savages. Defoe develops Robinson Crusoe as an intelligent man who despite his unlucky circumstance learns how to build a canoe, make bread and endure countless lonely years. 

In his novel, Defoe not only manages to encapsulate the tantalizing tale of a shipwreck he also illustrates a moral and religious dimension to the novel, published in the preface as instruction to readers of God's benevolent wisdom. During a hallucination Crusoe receives the message "Seeing all these things have not brought thee to repentance, now thou shalt die.”  and consequently turns a large portion of his life to studying God's word taking his ignorance to the Bible in his youth as the reason for the circumstance in which he finds himself in. Here links can be made with further religious imagery in such ways as Adam and Eve's expulsion from Eden after committing the first sins. 

In my personal opinion Defoe's greatest achievement within this novel is his characterisation of Friday, the 26 year old savage Crusoe saves and turns into his servant when he is about to be eaten by other cannibals. From the start Friday is presented as a loyal servant never appearing to question the authority Crusoe claims over him. Friday can be interpreted to represent all natives of America, Africa and Asia who would later come to be oppressed by European Imperialism (of which Robinson Crusoe is representative of). One of my favourite and most touching moments of the novel is when Friday is reunited with his father, his passion and animation is in strong contrast to Crusoe's emotions to his family, and Defoe translate the archaic image of a family reunion in such a touching manner it reduced me to tears.

I have to admit I disliked the ending to Robinson Crusoe, however, it is necessary to the narrative Defoe develops. The main reason my feelings towards the ending are negative is due to my desperation to explore more of Crusoe's life and see him reunited with many characters (most significantly Xury, my favourite character). Yet the way Crusoe finishes his novel is intelligent and makes sense with the way the rest of the novel is narrated, "I may perhaps give a farther account hereafter" being the last line. Defoe narrates the account of Crusoe's life on the island as a journal so this is a logical, and creative, way to end the text as well as creating every authors desire, the reader looking for more pages after the last pages. And with me Defoe achieved this, leaving me sat flicking through the last pages (in my edition being a Glossary and Notes) searching desperately for an extension of the plot!

To summarise, in Robinson Crusoe Defoe creates an incredible piece of art following the life of a lone sailor successfully leaving the reader hanging on every word. Defoe's language, as can be expected from an 18th century literary master, is quite complex and so I would recommend this book to more advanced readers (specifically A-level and upwards). Defoe achieves a brilliant novel, and although at times it lulled or the language got in the way, it is one of the best books I've read, thus I would rate it 8/10.

Examination Day - Henry Seslar

You can read this short story here.

Examination Day is a work of dystopian fiction with a focus on the oppression of knowledge and the mind. Despite it's length of just 2 pages Seslar develops a strong and relatable (yet slightly disturbing) tale foreshadowing the risks of the continuation of today's society. The determination of the government to remove the intelligent individuals highlights the awareness of the societal corruption created by them. Seslar uses this work as a blatant attack on the government in his direct reference to the "Government Educational Service". The most striking factor of this text to me is the fact the corruption passes into the family home where the father refuses to give the son any extra knowledge, when a home should be a place of freedom, suggesting it is impossible to escape for this totalitarian rule.

One of the most noticeable features of Seslar's story is his labeling of the boy as "600-115" when he goes to the facility highlighting the growing fear that people are becoming no more than just government statistics. The fact this statistic is formed for educational purposes means it can be supposed Seslar is highlighting the concern in the academic world that students are no more than just ''status earners" for the school in the modern day (a fear highlighted in multiple literary works, such as The History Boys). This same concern can also be seen in many aspect of modern life where people are becoming simply defined by a number, for example to banks we are just a credit card number. This  removes individual identity which seems to contradict with the way of the testing as intelligence is a very individual trait. Removal of identity could be seen as a portrayal of compassion by the government in that it is easier to kill someone who is no more than a number.

There is a Marxist message that can be portrayed within this text. Marxism is the focus on removing classes and creating equality. The government in this text seem to hold the belief that removal of intelligent individuals allows equal academic value and removes the risk of oppression. However, Seslar highlights the impossibility of reaching a Marxist state as there will always have to be a leader removing the corrupting force (commonly making this leader a corrupting force). However, this removal of the intelligent could be used as an approach to Marxism in the sense that as they have no one intelligent to take over power once the current leaders die there will be no one left to take charge making an equal society, and this gives a more positive message below the text. (Yet my favourite reading is still the ignorant nature of government).

The last sentence of this short story really sets the disturbing tone to this society, "Government Burial is ten dollars". In the grand scheme of things 10 dollars is not a lot of money and shows that the government really has no respect for the individual. In comparison to the current cost of living and price it is to raise a child (currently averaging at £250,000) $10 is nothing and gives the sense that it could in fact be looked on as the easy way out, especially for the parents, which is a very sinister idea.

All in all, this is the best short stories I've ever read (excluding Hemingway's 6 word story, "For sale: Baby Shoes, Never Worn") and raises so many questions in it's short text. I would recommend this for anyone of any age group especially those of a politically literate mind. Seslar I give you 10/10.

The Fault In Our Stars - John Green

So, I thought I would jump on the hype of The Fault In Our Stars that the world is currently caught up in as a response to the upcoming release of the screen adaptation. The basic story behind this novel can be seen as a common and slightly mundane teenage RomCom, but Green forms the text in such a way it differs from all over novels of a similar plot. There wasn't a single chapter where I wasn't brought to tears, either happy or sad! I must admit going into the text I didn't have high hopes going into it, but after continual persuasion from my friend I caved and ordered it and I wouldn't change that decision for the world! It had great competition in my mind because I'd just finished Allegiant, the final book in the Divergent Trilogy, which quickly stole my heart and it seemed impossible a book could take its place. But John Green congratulations you did it!

I struggled to put this book down as Green instantly develop strong characters who I felt I knew (which many authors struggle to create). I struggle to pinpoint why TFIOS is such a great text as it's not a classical, complex text filled with cryptic messages, it's just a clear, reasonably simple text and it's incredibly effective. The most incredible achievement of John Green in this text is the ability of a 36 year-old man to capture the character of a 16 year-old teenage girl effectively. Hazel Grace is a unique character, not just for her cancer, but also for her more mature mind, when meeting Augustus she doesn't just swoon and discuss how gorgeous he is (although she does mention it) which helps avoid the slightly sickly romance. Personally, my favourite characteristic of Hazel is her response to Augustus getting out a cigarette, she stands up to him. I think the reason she's such a brilliant character is her willingness to stand up to people and not just sit in a corner and accept her fate. The Star-Crossed lovers nature of Hazel and Augustus I feel also is a huge player in everyone's love for it, but personally the defining nature of this relationship is Hazel's refusal to become a "grenade". People generally think along the lines of 'she might not have long to live so she's bound to jump on a relationship' but John Green conflicts this approach showing her fear of the end and an instant similarity between the lovers (as one of the first things Gus tells us is "I fear oblivion,” he said without a moment’s pause. “I fear it like the proverbial blind man who’s afraid of the dark.”). 

To me Augustus is a perfect character, and my dream man (as I'm sure every female reader agrees), not just because of his dashing good looks, but his intelligence and way with words. John Green has created a love interest that isn't the stereotypical hottie he's witty and intelligent. If you don't believe me of his way with words, here's your proof:
“I’m in love with you, and I know that love is just a shout into the void, and that oblivion is inevitable, and that we’re all doomed and that there will come a day when all our labor has been returned to dust, and I know the sun will swallow the only earth we’ll ever have, and I am in love with you.” 
In short Green could of just written "I love you Hazel" or some other stereotypical confession of love but he is much more literate in his approach, and every time i read it my heart melts because the words are frankly beautiful. My favourite bit of this sentence is his reference to oblivion (his biggest fear) and saying he doesn't care about oblivion if it means he can love her!!

In conclusion, John Green has achieved an incredible piece of modern literature in The Fault In Our Stars that is perfect for all age groups and reduced me to tears continually (without ruining the plot I will just say I can look at a Christmas Tree again). Without Doubt I easily give TFIOS 10/10! Bravo John Green.

A side note is a question many people ask "Is An Imperial Affliction a real book?" I too was confused by this and John Green has said himself that no it is not and that Peter Van Houten is not a real person. However, his inspiration behind AIA was Infinite Jest (David Foster Wallace) and The Blood of The Lamb (Peter De Vries), they have gone straight on my summer reading list!

"You see we may not look like much but between the three of us we have: 5 legs, 4 eyes, 2 and a half pairs of working lungs"

How Late It Was, How Late - James Kelman

This book came to my possession on recommendation from my English Teacher as an incredible piece of Scottish Literature and this combined with its Booker Prize status gave me high hopes. In the first 10 pages I was intrigued as to how the slightly controversial event of disability caused through police force would be handled by Kelman. Unfortunately as I read I became more and more disappointed and had to force myself to read right to the end in hope of a big ending, which anyone who knows the book may agree is that the ending can feel greatly anti-climactic and I personally was devastated as I closed the book and dropped it on my bed with a sigh. However, it must be noted, after a week or two of consideration it is clear why so many people love the book, despite it still not holding a special place in my heart.
One of the things How Late It Was, How Late has gained a reputation for is it’s abundance of brutal dysphemism. Blake Morrison estimates that Kelman uses "fuck" four thousand times in this single text. It cannot be denied that this language is what dominated my judgment of the text throughout my reading. I (rather cruelly) concluded with myself that his Booker Prize was a consequence of the readers hilarity at this excessive use of dysphemistic language. And it would seem I am not alone, Simon Jenkins accused Kelman of doing no more than "transcribing the rambling thoughts of a blind Glaswegian drunk". I would agree with Jenkins as to me that is exactly what How Late It Was, How Late is on the surface, however I feel that there is a deeper message that is hard to reach without a dedicated literary mind. To me, particularly as I read, the story just seemed to be following a man who became blind in highly unfortunate situation who then spent the next 300 pages walking around going 'oh I’m blind' 'being blind is so much more different to having normal vision', which seems a futile and barefaced message. Another issue with the language of Kelman's novel is the working class Scottish dialect, to me this didn't cause issue if I focused but I can understand why to some people this vernacular can cause struggle. Yet I feel due to the characterisation of Sammy (the main character) this is a necessary narrative choice and actually added a lot to the text rather than taking great amounts away. 

I believe there is an important message behind what Kelman had narrated. We see a man put through significant physical and emotional distress by the Scottish police force, or "sodjers", and gain no sense of sympathy. This raises serious concerns of police oppression, in that their superiority gives them power to neglect the working class. Sammy's blindness can be taken as a metaphor for the blindness of society which is emphasized through his refusal to claim compensation. Is this just because Sammy is a mid aged, lazy, drunk Glaswegian or because of fear over the police's response? Personally I believe it is the later, but the influence may be the attitude Sammy has as a mid aged, lazy, drunk Glaswegian which constructs his opinion of the police force as oppressive. Perhaps the police as a whole in the novel are symbolic of the fear authority puts on normal people, allowing them to be an oppressive force.

Despite criticism of Kelman on certain elements, particularly language, its merit’s are present; however, I feel the ending really lets the novel down. In my opinion there are multiple directions Kelman could have taken the ending, even the slightest adaptation could improve it. The most obvious question the ending left me with is “what about Helen?” which I’m sure was one of Kelman’s intentions. When I read the last line I felt like I’d lost pages at the end as there were so many unanswered questions, though this can generally be seen as an effective literary technique I feel Kelman failed it. Instead of a dramatic ending that left the reader pondering questions, the text just seemed to fall on its face. There was further Kelman could of taken the text from the ending but by the phrasing of the ending I get the feeling any extension would continue much the same as the rest of the text, and frankly I would not be interested in reading it.

I would recommend that this text is for the more mature reader (advanced GCSE, A-level, degree level, or simply an adult mind), but it should be approached with a more keen literature attitude. Personally, I would not jump at the opportunity to read it again for leisure, but I would not protest to working with it again in a more academic circumstance. I would give How Late It Was, How Late a rather harsh 5/10... Sorry Kelman!